Clinicians working in mental health in-patient settings may have to use nasogastric tube feeding under physical restraint to reverse the life-threatening consequences of malnutrition when this is driven by a psychiatric condition such as a restrictive eating disorder.

To understand the decision-making process when nasogastric tube feeding under restraint is initiated in mental health in-patient settings.

People with lived experience of nasogastric tube feeding under restraint and parents/carers were recruited via the website of the UK's eating disorder charity BEAT. Eating disorder clinicians were recruited via an online post by the British Eating Disorders Society. Semi-structured interviews were administered to all participants.

Themes overlapped between the participant groups and were integrated in the final analysis. Two main themes were generated: first, ‘quick decisions’, with the subthemes of ‘medical risk’, ‘impact of not eating’ and ‘limited discussions’; second, ‘slow decisions’, with subthemes of ‘threats’, ‘discussions with patient’, ‘not giving up’ and ‘advanced directives’. Benefits and harms of both quick and slow decisions were identified.

This research offers a new perspective regarding how clinical teams can make best practice decisions regarding initiating nasogastric feeding under restraint. In-patient mental health teams facilitating this clinical intervention should consider discussing it with the patient at the beginning of their admission in anticipation of the need for emergency intervention and in full collaboration with the multidisciplinary team.

Veganism has increased in popularity in the past decade and, despite being a characteristic protected by law, is often viewed negatively by the general population. Little is known about the attitudes of healthcare professionals despite the potential influence on practice and eating disorder patient care. This is one of the first studies to investigate attitudes toward veganism within specialist eating disorder, general mental health and other professionals.

A one-way ANOVA indicated all professionals held positive views toward veganism. General mental health professionals held statistically more positive veganism attitudes than specialist eating disorder and other professionals.

As one of the first studies to suggest eating disorder professionals are not biased against veganism, it has important clinical practice implications, particularly when exploring motivations for adopting a vegan diet (health, weight loss, environmental or animal welfare concerns) in patients with eating disorders. Implications for further research are provided.

Bipolar disorder is a highly heritable polygenic disorder. Recent enrichment analyses suggest that there may be true risk variants for bipolar disorder in the expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) in the brain.

We sought to assess the impact of eQTL variants on bipolar disorder risk by combining data from both bipolar disorder genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and brain eQTL.

To detect single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that influence expression levels of genes associated with bipolar disorder, we jointly analysed data from a bipolar disorder GWAS (7481 cases and 9250 controls) and a genome-wide brain (cortical) eQTL (193 healthy controls) using a Bayesian statistical method, with independent follow-up replications. The identified risk SNP was then further tested for association with hippocampal volume (n = 5775) and cognitive performance (n = 342) among healthy individuals.

Integrative analysis revealed a significant association between a brain eQTL rs6088662 on chromosome 20q11.22 and bipolar disorder (log Bayes factor = 5.48; bipolar disorder P = 5.85×10–5). Follow-up studies across multiple independent samples confirmed the association of the risk SNP (rs6088662) with gene expression and bipolar disorder susceptibility (P = 3.54×10–8). Further exploratory analysis revealed that rs6088662 is also associated with hippocampal volume and cognitive performance in healthy individuals.

Our findings suggest that 20q11.22 is likely a risk region for bipolar disorder; they also highlight the informative value of integrating functional annotation of genetic variants for gene expression in advancing our understanding of the biological basis underlying complex disorders, such as bipolar disorder.

Wearing of gloves reduces transmission of organisms by healthcare workers' hands but is not a substitute for hand hygiene. Results of previous studies have varied as to whether hand hygiene is worse when gloves are worn. Most studies have been small and used nonstandardized assessments of glove use and hand hygiene. We sought to observe whether gloves were worn when appropriate and whether hand hygiene compliance differed when gloves were worn.

Observational study.

Healthcare workers in 56 medical or care of the elderly wards and intensive care units in 15 hospitals across England and Wales.

We observed hand hygiene and glove usage (7,578 moments for hand hygiene) during 249 one-hour sessions. Observers also recorded whether gloves were or were not worn for individual contacts.

Gloves were used in 1,983 (26.2%) of the 7,578 moments for hand hygiene and in 551 (16.7%) of 3,292 low-risk contacts; gloves were not used in 141 (21.1%) of 669 high-risk contacts. The rate of hand hygiene compliance with glove use was 41.4% (415 of 1,002 moments), and the rate without glove use was 50.0% (1,344 of 2,686 moments). After adjusting for ward, healthcare worker type, contact risk level, and whether the hand hygiene opportunity occurred before or after a patient contact, glove use was strongly associated with lower levels of hand hygiene (adjusted odds ratio, 0.65 [95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.79]; P<.0001).

The rate of glove usage is lower than previously reported. Gloves are often worn when not indicated and vice versa. The rate of compliance with hand hygiene was significantly lower when gloves were worn. Hand hygiene campaigns should consider placing greater emphasis on the World Health Organization indications for gloving and associated hand hygiene.

National Research Register N0256159318.